4 ms·
It's interesting idea but so I don't see it as a matter of tradeoffs since just the "richness" sounds undecidable by itself. I mean, dividing a set into "things
by joe_the_user 2y ago
It's interesting idea but so I don't see it as a matter of tradeoffs since just the "richness" sounds undecidable by itself. I mean, dividing a set into "things have low Kolmogorov complexity and things having high Kolmogorov complexity" is definitely undecidable so "any grouping that might make sense for your data" seems impossible without any other requirements.
- ironSkillet 2y agoThe "richness" definition also seemed hand wavey to me so I looked at the referenced paper. The actual definition of "richness" of an algorithm is that for any arbitrary partition P of your original data (singletons, one cluster, etc), there is a distance function on the data, which when used in the clustering algorithm, produces P.